“Much I marvelled this ungainly fowl to hear discourse so plainly,
Though its answer little meaning, little relevancy bore.”

The government normally has to get a court order to monitor domestic communications, but Bush signed an executive order directing the NSA to conduct the operations without a judge’s approval.

Believed to be. Normally has. Without a.

Negligence.

Broken record.

So instead of actually READING and going through it, they just called for impeachment and censure, blasted the president in all media outlets, whipped up a bunch of fear-mongering of ‘bush is spying on your domestic phone call to your mother’.

Amazing.

Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

Bbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz – Wrong….

- Don’t you just love how so many of the moonbats never know what the others are doing. Don’t look now Sparky, but yesterday, *gasp*, some of your own Dimbulb Senators had just finished reviewing the entire program, and said its not only right, its “absolutely vital” to the WOT, openly praised the Presidents efforts, and said they were totally impressed.

- Evidently you amd other tinhats didn’t get the memo. Impeachment/censure? You guys must have a total political death wish, you’re so immersed in your hate vendetta against Bush/Rove. I don’t blame you really. They’ve beat your heads in like a drum in the past two elections. *snort*

- Bang’s fangs

I particularly enjoy the part of their movie where they eat their own. Pass the jello please, Mr. Feingold.

What are your credentials. Do you know it’s not just Bush making the claim? I at least recognize there is a debate although I fall on the side of those who recognize the commander in chief’s authority during the time of war to surveille enemy communications.

Censure would be the biggest gift to Republicans this election year.

The gist, however, is that warrantless wiretapping of communications (phone, e-mail) is permitted for 15 days following the outbreak of war. Thereafter, the NSA is obligated to seek warrants for specific acts of surveillance, with a 72-hour grace period in cases of extreme urgency.

What is suspected, and we may have confirmation of this from insider leaked reports, is that the NSA program is actually a resucitation of Poindexter’s TIA program, which essentially sifts all traffic with algorithms, effectively surveilling everybody.

We know that equipment installed at the backbone level of the communications infrastructure can achieve that task easily. But since the Bush administration is deploying this program without warrants, we have no official record of who is being monitored, and that, really, is the problem.

In the absence of warrants, there’s simply no way to verify Bush’s claim that he’s following the rules, or that the instances of surveillance in question always involve at least one overseas party or an al-qaeda suspect. But when Bush formally admitted that he has been circumventing FISA, well, then he admitted to breaking the law.

Censure should be the least of his worries.

Let’s investigate this thing and find out if its legal or not.

If not, we can allow GWB and ALL other Presidents to do so.

If not. no censure. Impeachment!!

But, I’ll leave you with this. The NSA’s actions authorized by the president has many constitutional scholars puzzled as to why the Democrats are claiming illegality. It’s nice to ACT like you are for the constitution and someone else isn’t but why not debate the substance. Do you recognize the FISA court itself in 2002 said that the President has the right to have warrantless surviellance of enemy communications? Does that weigh in to your thinking at all or do you dismiss it?

Then here comes Feingold, meeping about “censure,” as if Bush had done something wrong! Puh-leeze… Why, a formal censure would get the press and the population talking about NSA and the WMD thing, deals for ports, next thing you know, Bush might actually become unpopular!

It’s good to know that we have real, true-blooded Americans who can stand up and defend the Constitution against whistleblowers and nit-pickers like Feingold. Oh this is soooo good! Pure gold!

That was the CLINTON administration.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Secret files obtained by the White House on officials from Republican administrations allegedly included Internal Revenue Service records as well as FBI files, according to a Republican senator.

In a letter to FBI director Louis Freeh, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said that his judiciary committee staff discovered IRS documents while reviewing the controversial files.

Grassley said the aide who saw the documents did not take a close look at the IRS documents he saw “because of the confidential nature of IRS information.” The senator told Freeh in the letter he wanted an explanation by Thursday.

Former IRS commissioner Don Alexander, who served under President Richard Nixon, said the new allegations are disturbing if they are true.

“FBI files are one thing, that’s bad enough, but IRS files are worse,” Alexander said.

Alexander helped draft post-Watergate reforms after that scandal revealed that Nixon had used the IRS to dig up dirt on political opponents.

“I don’t want some clowns in the White House .. to go back to some days that I thought were finished forever in this country,” he said.

Last week, a source close to former White House security chief Craig Livingstone told CNN that the White House still has not released the names of at least five key Republicans whose FBI files they obtained. The White House says it has turned over everything it has.
Link

The continuing investigation into the White House’s handling of confidential FBI files, the House Government Oversight Committee questioned those staffers involved in the scandal.

Link

I support the senators!
Investigate!

It sure looks like the White House is Corrupt!

FBI Refutes Claims of Arbitrarily Investigating Advocacy Groups
Washington, DC – Recent statements by officials of the American Civil Liberties Union including those carried by the news media (”FBI Watched Activist Groups,” The New York Times, 12/20/2005; “FBI Papers Show Terror Inquiries into PETA, Other Groups,” Washington Post (12/20/2005) are misleading and imply that the FBI has engaged in unauthorized or otherwise inappropriate investigative activity. The FBI does not investigate any public interest or advocacy group based on the group’s lawful activities or political beliefs. Investigations and interviews of individuals conducted as part of a criminal and/or terrorism investigation are always predicated on specific information about a potential criminal act or terrorist threat, and, they are conducted in strict conformance with federal law, Department of Justice investigative guidelines and FBI policies. FBI Agents are obliged to respond to all threats of violence under FBI jurisdiction and take an oath to conduct such investigations within the bounds of the Constitution, while respecting the dignity and civil liberties of the public.

As the present Freedom of Information Act releases have shown, the FBI collects a vast amount of information—lawfully and appropriately—including public source material, which is then later indexed and is retrievable. The existence of a file naming an individual or organization does not, in itself, indicate that the FBI has in the past or is presently investigating that individual or group. FBI files are composed of any record or communication regarding an individual or organization that may have been indexed under that individual’s or organization’s name in the Central Records System; these records would include any communications that individual or organization may have had with the FBI. This would include requests for information, as well as coordination of meetings or reports by other individuals about the individual or organization.